Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of study quality

From: The economic impact of epilepsy: a systematic review

  1 2 3 4 5 6
Beghi et al. 2004 [14] Y Y Y Y ? Y
De Zelicourt et al. 2000 [20] Y Y Y Y ? Y
Helmstaedter et al. 2000 [33] Y Y N ? ? Y
Lindsten et al. 2002 [21] Y Y N Y N ?
Pato Pato et al. 2010 [22] Y N Y ? Y Y
Das et al. 2007 [25] Y Y N Y ? Y
Tetto et al. 2002 [19] Y N Y ? ? Y
Kotsopolous et al. 2003 [17] Y ? N ? ? Y
Langfitt et al. 2007 [18] Y Y Y Y Y Y
Halpern et al. 2011 [34] ? Y N N N Y
Farmer et al. 1992 [26] Y ? N Y N ?
Boon et al 2002 [15] Y Y Y ? Y ?
Guerrini et al. 2001 [16] Y Y ? ? ? ?
Cockerell et al 1994 [4] Y ? ? N ? ?
Balabanov et al 2008 [24] Y Y N ? Y N
Lagunju et al 2011 [32] Y Y Y N/A Y Y
Strzelczyk et al 2013 [23] Y Y Y ? Y Y
Lv et al 2009 [28] Y Y ? ? ? ?
Doumbia-Outtara et al. 2010 [31] Y N/A Y ? Y N/A
Dongmo et al. 2003 [30] Y N/A Y ? Y N/A
Haroon et al. 2012 [29] Y Y Y ? Y Y
Vlasov et al 2010 [27] Y N ? N Y Y
  1. Measurement of study quality was based on the Joanna Briggs Quality Assessment Appraisal checklist available at: http://joannabriggs.org/assets/docs/sumari/ReviewersManual-2011.pdf; 2013
  2. Quality appraisal criteria:
  3. 1. Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined?
  4. 2. Were confounding factors identified and strategies to deal with them stated?
  5. 3. Were outcomes assessed using objective criteria?
  6. 4. Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis?
  7. 5. Were outcomes measured in a reliable way?
  8. 6. Were appropriate statistical analyses used?